Thread

  1. Re: Bound memory usage during manual slot sync retries

    Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com> — 2026-05-26T20:01:09Z

    > On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 7:03 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
    > wrote:
    > >
    > > Okay, then let's go with a per-retry memory context approach.
    > >
    > > @@ -579,6 +579,8 @@ drop_local_obsolete_slots(List *remote_slot_list)
    > >      local_slot->data.database));
    > >   }
    > >   }
    > > +
    > > + list_free(local_slots);
    > >  }
    > >
    > > Why do we need this retail pfree if the caller is using memory context?
    > >
    >
    > I see that the latest patch in email [1] has already addressed this
    > point. So, I'll push the v2 version.
    >
    > [1] -
    > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABPTF7WB4Z62sPoZkhSygOCAo3OiTDLpMELxZDuwCb3HYgM_pQ%40mail.gmail.com
    
    
    Thanks. My original reasoning for adding the pfree here was to act as a
    safety guard in case other future callers might not manage the memory
    properly. But Zhijie pointed out that this double-free pattern is not
    favored in previous community discussions. I'll post the  worst-case test
    and its results later.
    
    
    Regards,
    Xuneng Zhou
    HighGo Software Co., Ltd.